Category Archives: politics

New York Times Gets It Wrong–Moscow Demograohic Summit Is About Declining Birthrates

A recent new York Times article (“<a href=”http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/world/europe/10iht-abortion10.html?scp=1&amp;sq=Russians%20Adopt%20U.S.%20tactics%20In%20Opposing%20Abortion&amp;st=cse” target=”_new”>Russians Adopt U.S. tactics In Opposing Abortion</a>”) mischaracterizes the upcoming <a href=”http://worldcongress.ru” target=”_new”>Moscow Demographic Summit: The Family and The Future of Humankind</a> – June 29-30 a the Russian State Social University – as “an international anti-abortion meeting.”

World Congress of Families Managing Director Larry Jacobs, who was mentioned in The Times’ story twice, set the record straight: “While it’s true that World Congress of Families is uncompromisingly  pro-life, as part of our natural family agenda, the Moscow Demographic Summit is first and foremost about the dramatic worldwide decline of birthrates, and only secondarily about abortion. Our goals are to analyze the phenomenon, examine how we reached this crisis and suggest solutions to what could be the greatest challenge confronting humanity in this century.”

Jacobs continued, “While abortion has played an undeniable role in this tragedy, it’s far from the only factor. Late marriage, cohabitation and the culturally induced desire for small families are among the many factors which have led to a 50% decline in birthrates worldwide since the late 1960s.  While pro-life spokesmen (Russian and international) will play a prominent role in the Summit, so too will demographers, economists, sociologists, authors, researchers and political and religious leaders, whose primary concern lies in other areas.”

In discussing growing Russian opposition to abortion on demand, The New York Times also failed to note the grim reality the nation faces: It’s birthrate is barely 1.2 (children per woman) with a birthrate of 2.1 needed just to replace current population. It’s been estimated that in Russia today there are 4 million abortions annually and only 1.7 million live births. “This is national suicide by ‘choice.’” Jacobs comments.

For more information about the Moscow Demographic Summit, including a partial list of speakers, go to <a href=”http://www.worldcongress.ru” target=”_new”>www.worldcongress.ru</a> or see the May 27 article titled <a href=”http://www.profam.org/press/wcf.pr.110527.htm” target=”_new”>”Moscow Demographic Summit One Month Away</a>”.

The Summit has been endorsed by Patriarch Kirill, head of the Russian Orthodox Church. In a message to delegates, Patriarch Kirill noted that the purpose of the Summit is “to defend traditional family values and to analyze the world’s demographic problems.”

Click <a href=”http://cts.dundee.net/t/39155912/105413499/94233/194″ target=”_new”>here</a> for the full text of Patriarch Kirill’s letter to Summit participants.

Court Upholds School Expulsion, Assault Charges of 14-Year-Old Honor Student Over Shooting Plastic ‘Spitwads’

(SPOTSYLVANIA, Va) The Circuit Court of the County of Spotsylvania has refused to reverse the expulsion of a 14-year-old honor student charged under a school zero tolerance policy with “violent criminal conduct” and possession of a weapon for shooting plastic “spitwads” at classmates. Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute had petitioned the court to intervene on behalf of Andrew Mikel, a freshman at Spotsylvania High School, who was expelled for the remainder of the school year for allegedly using the body of a pen to blow small, hollow plastic balls akin to spitwads at fellow students. School officials also referred the matter to local law enforcement for criminal prosecution. Mikel has been homeschooled since the incident occurred in December 2010. Institute attorneys have offered their assistance to the Mikel family should they choose to appeal the court’s ruling.

“We’re greatly disappointed by this ruling, which does not in any way see justice served,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Andrew Mikel is merely the latest in a long line of victims of school zero tolerance policies whose educations have been senselessly derailed by school administrators lacking in both common sense and compassion.”

On December 10, 2010, ninth grader Andrew Mikel, a student at Spotsylvania High School, was sent to the principal’s office after shooting a handful of small, hollow pellets akin to plastic spitwads at fellow students in the school hallway during lunch period. Mikel, an honor student active in Junior ROTC and in his church, was initially suspended for 10 days and charged with criminal assault and possession of a weapon under the school’s Student Code of Conduct. The Spotsylvania County School Board later voted to expel Mikel for the remainder of the school year, allegedly on the recommendation of the school’s assistant principal. School officials also referred the matter to local law enforcement, which initiated juvenile criminal proceedings for assault, resulting in Mikel being placed in a diversion program, as well as having to take substance abuse and anger management counseling.

Decrying the school’s actions as arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute filed a legal petition with the Circuit Court of the County of Spotsylvania asking the court to overturn the School Board’s decision. Institute attorneys also challenged the school’s characterization of Mikel’s actions as “criminal” and the spitwads as “weapons,” contending that there was no indication that Mikel intended to harm anyone and the plastic tube and pellets did not rise to the level of “weapons” as defined by the school code. Furthermore, Institute attorneys insist that Mikel’s conduct did not rise to the level required for expulsion or long-term suspension under the Student Code of Conduct. As a result of the criminal charges, Mikel, who had hoped to attend the U.S. Naval Academy following graduation from high school, can no longer be considered as an applicant.

Mikel’s father, a former Navy Seabee and Marine officer, who was awarded a meritorious service medal for solving the problem of “brown-out” for helicopters in Iraq (the sand caused static electricity that interfered with instruments during landing), credits his son with inspiring the solution. “I fought for my country and the rights of people here, and my family sacrificed right along with me,” stated Mikel Sr. “The actions of the school system are completely inconsistent with what I fought for.”

Source: Rutherford Institute News, May 24, 2011.

WHO-Approves Abortion Drug Promises Life, and Death

By Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D.

NEW YORK (C-FAM)  By authorizing the use of a single drug, the World Health Organization has simultaneously raised hopes for saving thousands of mothers’ lives and raised fears that the drug will also be used to kill perhaps millions of unborn children. Misoprostol is used to help stop bleeding during delivery, the main cause of maternal deaths, but it can also be used to induce at-home abortions, which are very dangerous, particularly in rural areas that lack primary or emergency medical care.

The fears are grounded in the fact that WHO approved use of the drug by unskilled personnel and that both WHO and Gynuity Health Projects, the organization which sought the drug’s approval, advocate the use of misoprostol for abortion outside the hospital setting.

WHO says its “work over the past three decades has contributed significantly to the emergence and wide acceptance of the current recommended regime” of medical abortion, according to one of its recent reports. WHO has trained midwives throughout the developing world to perform abortions in order to eliminate the need for physicians, the report says. In Vietnam alone, the trials included 1,734 women, and its misoprostol-induced abortions are conduced up to 63 days, WHO says.

Gynuity is working to mainstream the use of misoprostol for self-induced abortions. According to a 2009 Gynuity report, the organization works at the community level to cast self-induced abortion in a positive light, and to “oppose legislation introduced at the state or federal level that furthers the concept of fetal personhood.”

The WHO’s decision is similar to Federal Drug Administration approval in the U.S., ensuring that the drug is legitimized for use without a doctor and that it will be stocked in pharmacies all over the world.

Another concern is that use of misoprostol causes birth defects. Gynuity’s own 2002 report shows that when misoprostol is used for abortion, the risk of birth defects increases, most commonly causing clubfoot, cranial nerve abnormalities, and absence of the fingers.

When used to reduce post-partum hemorrhaging, pro-life physician Joe DeCook says misoprostol is a “wonder drug” since it does not have to be refrigerated or injected in non-sterile, rural environments. “But it’s like morphine. It can be used for good or for evil.”

Other physicians are even more skeptical. Maternal Life International (MLI) advised the WHO that approving the drug outside the hospital setting sets a double standard. “Women in resource limited settings are expected to give birth with unskilled or semi-skilled birth attendants,” MLI’s Dr. George Mulcaire-Jones said, “This fact alone leads to higher maternal and infant mortality rates than those in developed countries” and gives women “the false assurance that their deliveries will be ‘safe’.”

A quarter of all medical abortions fail and require medical attention in a hospital setting, DeCook said, and after seven weeks, risks to the life of the mother increase dramatically. “They may be able to show a decrease in the number of maternal mortalities because they will decrease the number of deliveries by abortion,” DeCook said, “but they will have no idea how many women will die in their wake.”

This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.”

Is This the Best We Can Do?

by Gary Palmer

In his centennial address to Congress in 1876, President James A. Garfield said, “Now, more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless or corrupt, it’s because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature.”

He added, “If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”

When I read that statement, my first thought was of Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) who is at the center of the most recent scandal in Congress. Weiner, who was widely viewed as a rising star among Democrats and a possible candidate for mayor of New York City or governor of New York, was accused of texting raunchy pictures of himself to at least six women around the country.

As is so often the case with integrity-challenged politicians, he initially tried to lie his way out. And, as is so often the case, he ultimately had to admit what he had done to the great embarrassment of his wife, family, Congressional colleagues and many in the left-wing media who hopelessly tried to defend him.

Speaking of how some in the left-wing media have reported on this, Barbara Walters made a bizarre attempt to make Sarah Palin’s bus tour somehow the equivalent of Weiner sending lewd pictures he took of himself. And MSNBC talk show host Chris Matthews even implied that Weiner’s actions were his wife’s fault.

With the exception of Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) who has called for him to resign, Republican members of Congress have largely remained quiet about Weiner. That is not surprising. Most recently, Rep. Christopher Lee and Sen. John Ensign both resigned because of sex-related scandals. Apparently, the difference between Republicans and Democrats caught in sex scandals is that Republicans are expected to resign, Democrats are expected to stay in office.

Since 2000, there have been at least 16 members of Congress embroiled in sex scandals. And those are just the ones who got caught in Washington, and only involved sex scandals. The list does not include Congressmen charged with other offenses such as tax evasion and public corruption.

The future of America depends largely on the character and courage of its people, and that in turn must be reflected in the leaders we elect. It is of paramount importance that the majority of members of Congress in both parties have reliably high standards of morality and integrity. While their ideas about the role of government and taxes and spending may still be suspect, we should at least have confidence that the vast majority don’t cheat on their spouses, send lewd photos and messages over their cell phones, cheat on their taxes or engage in corrupt activities. If we can’t trust them, then the people must shoulder the responsibility to elect people we can.

The vast majority of people expect representatives at every level of government to exercise good judgment, conduct themselves with integrity and to a great extent, to be role models, regardless of their political party. Moreover, most people want to conduct their own lives by high standards of good judgment, morality and integrity.

Given that, why is it that the weakest and least trustworthy among us keep getting elected?

In my opinion, as President Garfield warned, it is because those who shape our enterprise, our culture and our morality have not been of “… aid in controlling the political forces.” Too few people with the ability to shape our enterprise, culture and morality have been willing to speak out while too many qualified people have written off politics as too dirty for honest people. Consequently, by steering clear of politics, good people allow those with less character, less moral restraint and oftentimes with less ability, to be presented as our only choices.

The question we have to consider isn’t whether or not politicians such as Anthony Weiner or John Ensign are the only ones we can choose from. That question is answered every time a good man or woman who is qualified to hold office decides to run or not to run. It is also answered every time voters cast their votes based on their allegiance to a political party or their own self-interests, instead of the character of the candidates or what is truly best for the nation.

In that regard, given the current state of the nation and its present course, President Garfield’s statement is a stinging indictment of the choices we have made. With so many scandals involving our elected leaders, we have to ask ourselves … is this the best we can do?

Gary Palmer is president of the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families, which are indispensable to a prosperous society.

Gov. Kaisch and Senator Brown’s Battle for Ohio Taxpayer Money

Govenor Kaisch has decided to drop out of the National Governor’s Association (NGA), according to the Columbus Dispatch. Kaisch wants to save Ohio the $176,000 annual dues. Moreover, he claims the costs are greater than the benefits. Of course, the NGA’s recent report that spot lighted some of Kaisch’s budget balancing cuts as among the biggest in the nation might influenced his decision just a little bit.

While Gov. Kaisch is trying to save the state money, Senator Sherrod Brown want to increase the cost of government in Ohio. Brown is seeking donation to campaign agianst Ohio newly revised public employee collective bargaining law known as Sentate Bill 5. It’s understandable why Senator Brown is stumping against SB5. If he stuck to just making federal laws, his collective baragaing union voters would likely vote for someone else the next election.

Readers might have guessed that this blogger favors SB5. Saving taxpayers money is a good thing. Reformation that benefits non-union workers and taxpayers is a good thing too. Even better is local and state representatives enabled to represent the best interest of their community taxpayers rather than being hamstrung by rigid collective bargaining law that favor the public unions. And inspite of the growing number of public employees, the majority of Ohio workers are not members of any union.

If memory serves, Governor Kaisch signed SB5 into law.

E.coli superbug outbreak in Germany due to abuse of antibiotics in meat production

The e.coli outbreak in Germany is raising alarm worldwide as scientists are now describing this particular strain of e.coli as “extremely aggressive and toxic.” Even worse, the strain is resistant to antibiotics, making it one of the world’s first widespread superbug food infections that’s racking up a noticeable body count while sickening thousands.

Of course, virtually every report you’ll read on this in the mainstream media has the facts wrong. This isn’t about cucumbers being dangerous, because e.coli does not grow on cucumbers. E.coli is an intestinal strain of bacteria that only grows inside the guts of animals (and people). Thus, the source of all this e.coli is ANIMAL, not vegetable.

But the media won’t admit that. Because the whole agenda here is to kill your vegetables but protect the atrocious practices of the factory animal meat industries. The FDA, in particular, loves all these outbreaks because it gives them more moral authority to clamp down on gardens and farms. They’ve been trying to irradiate and fumigate fresh veggies in the USA for years.

The above is an except from a recent article by Natural News editor Mike Adams. In the article, he goes into greater detail about factory farm practices and how to protect yourself from mutated e.coli.

To read the rest of the article, go to http://www.naturalnews.com/032590_ecoli_superbugs.html.

More States Abandon Film Tax Incentives as Programs’ Ineffectiveness Becomes More Apparent, Except Ohio

Film tax credits fail to live up to their promises to encourage economic growth overall and to raise tax revenue. States claim these incentives create jobs, but the jobs created are mostly temporary positions, often transplanted from other states. Furthermore, the competition among states transfers a large portion of potential gains to the movie industry, not to local businesses or state coffers.

In 2010, a record 40 states offered $1.4 billion in film and television tax incentives. All told, states have provided nearly $6 billion for such programs over the past decade. 2010 will likely stand as the peak year, since many governors and legislators are ending their programs, preferring to use the money for other priorities or leave it with taxpayers.

Thus far, 17 states have either cut or cut back their funding for the film and television tax incentive programs.

After early indications that he might challenge the program, Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) sought no changes.

In March, the Dayton Daily News reported about the relief of the many Dayton area art, film and tv production organizations. Many are supported by the Ohio Art Council.

Although an economic development boom the art and film industry is an overstatement, the many organizations do provide both meaningful employment and volunteer work for a substantial number of area residents. One such organization is the Xenia Area Community Theatre.

Source: Fiscal Facts,Tax Foundation, June 2, 2011

Dayton Tea Party Seeks Investigation of Ohio Municipal League & Ohio Township Association

The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, on behalf of the Dayton Tea
Party and Dayton Tea Party President and Founder Rob Scott, yesterday filed in the Ohio Supreme Court a Public Records Complaint demanding Ohio Municipal League (OML) and Ohio Township Association (OTA) lobbying records.

Both the OML and OTA have used public funds to lobby against Ohio Estate Tax repeal and other tax cuts, property rights and the right to bear arms, and in favor of inflated state spending.

“The Dayton Tea Party is about empowering taxpayers,” said Rob Scott, founder of the Dayton Tea Party. “The bedrock of our government and what the Founding Fathers understood was open government. Local governments throughout Ohio are using taxpayer money in order to lobby the Ohio General Assembly for more taxpayer money. The organizations that are being provided the public’s money need some accountability. Ohioans have a right to know.”

The Ohio Municipal League is a non-profit organization that was created by city government officials, and is comprised of and funded by more than 250 cities and 680 villages. The Ohio Township Association is an association of Ohio townships whose membership contains 99.8 percent of all elected township trustees and township fiscal officers in Ohio.

Both groups exist and survive due to public funding, and invest these funds in advocacy for greater government spending, and against tax cuts and individual rights. Lately, both have heavily advocated for greater state spending on local governments and against repeal of Ohio’s worst-in-the-nation Estate Tax (80 percent of estate tax revenue is transferred to local governments).

Under the “Functional Equivalency Test” a nominally non-public Ohio entity can be subjected to the Public Records Act if it is the functional equivalent of a public office. The test’s factors include the level of government funding and the extent of government involvement or regulation.

The 1851 Center argues that the OML and OTA are the functional equivalent of public offices, as both organizations were created by, are funded by, and exist to serve local governments and public officials.

“Ohioans have a right to know the politically and ideologically-motivated ends to which their tax dollars are being put, and rise in opposition to those ends,” said 1851 Center Director Maurice Thompson.

“Through the OML and OTA, Ohio’s local officials tax their citizens and use these tax dollars to lobby for higher taxes yet, all the while escaping scrutiny for this agenda by running it through the OML or OTA. Citizens have a right to know exactly how and why their hard-earned money is being used like this.”

One Week in the Life of a Police State

By John W. Whitehead

While Americans have been busy getting and spending, the powers-that-be have erected a police/surveillance state around us. This is reflected in the government’s single-minded quest to acquire ever greater powers, the fusion of the police and the courts, and the extent to which our elected representatives have sold us out to the highest bidders—namely, the corporate state and military industrial complex.

Indeed, a handful of seemingly unrelated incidents in the week leading up to Memorial Day perfectly encapsulate how much the snare enclosing us has tightened, how little recourse we really have—at least in the courts, and how truly bleak is the landscape of our freedoms. What these incidents reveal is that the governmental bureaucracy has stopped viewing us, the American people, as human beings who should be treated with worth and dignity. That was the purpose of the Bill of Rights. The Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures of our persons and effects was designed so that government agents would be forced to treat us with due respect. With this protection now gone, those who attempt to exercise their rights will often be forced to defend themselves against an increasingly inflexible and uncompromising government.

For example, on May 24, 2011, a Virginia Circuit Court refused to reverse the expulsion of a 14-year-old honor student charged under a school zero tolerance policy with “violent criminal conduct” and possession of a weapon for shooting plastic “spitballs” at classmates. This young man was eventually faced with three assault and battery charges as a result of three students being hit on the arms by the spitballs. Despite the fact that the judge acknowledged the school’s punishment to be overreaching, he refused to intervene, essentially washing his hands of the matter and leaving it to the schools to act as they see fit.

Two days later, on May 26, the U.S. Supreme Court—the highest court in the land, in a devastating ruling that could very well do away with what little Fourth Amendment protections remain to public school students and their families, threw out a lower court ruling in Alford v. Greene which required government authorities to secure a warrant, a court order or parental consent before interrogating students at school. The ramifications are far-reaching, rendering public school students as wards of the state. Once again, the courts sided with law enforcement against the rights of the people.

That night, in a race against the clock, Congress pushed through a four-year extension of three controversial provisions in the USA Patriot Act that authorize the government to use aggressive surveillance tactics in the so-called war against terror. Within hours of the Patriot Act extension being passed, however, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, revealed that the government has been broadly interpreting the Patriot Act for its own purposes and keeping that interpretation under wraps.

Then, on May 28, a small group of young people showed up at the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, DC, to protest a recent appeals court ruling that expressive dancing is prohibited at the memorial. Swaying minimally to whatever music was in their heads, the small group barely had time to “bust a move” before Park Police descended on them. The resulting fracas, in which police choked and body slammed one protester, Adam Kokesh, handcuffed others and shut the memorial down altogether, was captured on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jUU3yCy3uI).

For anyone wanting to truly understand what it is to live in a police state, which U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas defined as one “in which all dissent is suppressed or rigidly controlled,” I would strongly recommend watching the footage. This Jefferson Memorial event is just the latest in a long series of incidents that clearly illustrate the extent to which our government has adopted an authoritarian mindset, one that is most clearly seen in the way law enforcement deals with American citizens.

Consider, for example, a recent incident involving a young ex-Marine who was killed after a SWAT team kicked open the door of his Arizona home during a drug raid and opened fire. According to news reports, Jose Guerena, 26 years old and the father of two young children, grabbed a gun in response to the forced invasion but never fired. Police officers were not as restrained. The young Iraqi war veteran was allegedly fired upon 71 times in what appears to be yet another senseless killing. Guerena had no prior criminal record, and the police found nothing illegal in his home.

Shocking, yes, but what’s more shocking is that such raids, which annihilate the Fourth Amendment, are actually being sanctioned by the courts. Just a few weeks ago, the Indiana Supreme Court broadly ruled in Barnes v. State that people don’t have the right to resist police officers who enter their homes illegally. And then within days of that ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively decimated the Fourth Amendment in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King by giving police more leeway to smash down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant when in search of illegal drugs which they suspect might be destroyed if the Fourth Amendment requirement of a warrant were followed.

What these assorted court rulings and incidents add up to is a nation that is fast imploding, one that is losing sight of what freedom is really all about and, in the process, is transitioning from a republic governed by the people to a police state governed by the strong arm of the law. In such an environment, the law becomes yet another tool to oppress the people.

America is spiraling into an authoritarian vortex from which there appears to be no return. And if freedom is to survive, we’re going to need leaders—not talking news heads or politicians at rallies—who will, like the great dissidents of the past such as Mahatma Gandhi, dare to defy the “law” and the establishment in effectuating change.

One thing is clear: the time to act is now.

[The above is an edited version of the full article by the same title. The unedited version is worth reading, which you can do by clicking here.]

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about the Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Memorial Day, Remembering

By Daniel Downs

On this Memorial Day, the victories, tragedies and sacrifices of war remain fresh memories to many Americans. Each soldier who made it home alive and whole is certainly one victory celebrated by family and friends. Another was the Navy Seals accomplishment in executing justice to Osama bin Laden.

The tragedy of 9-11, of loved ones killed in battle, and even the collateral damage of a seemingly unjust military action in Iraq that led soldiers like Timothy McVey to perpetrate the Oklahoma City bombings are all remembered anew today.

Amidst the feelings of sorrow, the honorable sacrifices of those who willingly gave their lives to serve their country, their loved ones, their God, and the ideals of liberty, justice, and peace cannot be forgotten. For sacrificial service is the path to a better life.

America was founded by those who not only exemplified this kind of sacrificial service but they followed the one who made it possible for them to do so. God was their leader in the battle for liberty, justice, and peace. After the war for Independence has been won, General George Washington gave God the providential honors for the rag-tag militia’s final victory. That was also the reason why America celebrated the Declaration of Independence above the Constitution until after the Civil War era.

It is right that America honors all of those men and women who have devoted their lives to protecting and to serving us. Yet, it would not be right to regard their military service as the sole means of our collective protection. The war against injustice is waged by all of those involved in our system of justice whether police, intelligence services, lawyers, judges, and even private sector advocates. Just as George Washington confirmed our national covenant, the protection of a free nation such as ours ultimately is realized through God’s actions. It may also be said that by our collective honor of and obedience to God we become better equipped to defend ourselves, our loved ones, and our nation.

American founders like Thomas Jefferson envisioned America as a kind of new Israel. Their model is found in the Bible. As depicted in the second book called Exodus, God may have delivered Israel from the enslaving power of the Egyptian government, but it was the liberated men of Israel, empowered by the presence of God, who defeated all of their enemies in Canaan; that is, when they were following the instructions and strategies revealed by God. The founders similarly viewed American liberty. They viewed the victory of the war for independence as God delivering them from the Pharisaic power of the enslaving British imperial military in the colonies. It was won through divinely empowered colonists who willingly sacrificed their lives to liberate and protect their families, communities, their colonial states.

Therefore, in the tradition of remembering those who devote their lives to the divinely ordained sacrificial service of liberty and justice, thanks is offered to God first and secondly to all of those men and women whose service honors that tradition.

And yet, in light of the expansion of America’s empire from 50 federated republican states to world dominance, can it be said of America that it is still the champion of life, liberty, justice, and the pursuit of happiness? More importantly, can it still be said that the tradition of sacrificial service to defend life and liberty is still honored while millions of unborn Americans are not allowed to live to enjoy the same? Does not this tragedy of our unabated cultural war cast a dark and heavy shadow over the past shining examples of liberty and justice, duty and honor?

Yes, a more fundamental and more important war has yet to be won. If won, life will be better and a greater measure of peace will be realized. The right to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness will no longer be threatened. For without the absolute right to life, all other rights and privileges are empty words in the mouths of tyrants.